What Kind of Townhouse Can You Get in Lincoln Park for $600K? 704 W. Wrightwood
In a recent discussion of a vintage 2-bedroom unit at 562 W. Arlington in Lincoln Park listed at $595,000, I commented in the thread that buyers could get a townhouse in the neighborhood for the same price (instead of living a condo in a 3 or 4-flat.)
Anonny replied:
“I’d love to see such a listing. Aside from the fact that many townhouses in LP are dumps (often priced in the $400’s by the area south of Oz or in the immediate vicinity of Alcott, etc.), I’m trying to think of any $595k townhouse developments in this particular neighborhood. And yes, when you say “the neighborhood,” that means something. Show me a (ideally non-dump) townhouse for $595k that’s in no worse a LP location than this place.”
This 3-bedroom townhouse at 704 W. Wrightwood recently came on the market.
It is just 2 blocks away from the unit on Arlington so I am assuming that counts as “in the neighborhood.”
Built in 1977, it has an entrance with a 20 foot high foyer.
The three bedrooms are on the upper floors with 2 bedrooms on the second and the master bedroom on the third level with its own “spa-like” master bath with separate shower and jacuzzi tub.
The kitchen is newer with cherry cabinets, granite counter tops and stainless steel appliances.
At 2500 square feet, it also has a lower level family room.
It has 2 outdoor spaces including a terrace and a private deck.
As an added bonus, this townhouse is “fee simple” meaning there are no assessments.
Will buyers choose more space and the added privacy of a townhouse over similarly priced condos in the neighborhood?
See the discussion on the Arlington property here.
Sam Shaffer at Chicago Properties has the listing. See the pictures here.
704 W. Wrightwood: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 2500 square feet, 1 car parking
- Sold in June 1990 for $283,000
- Sold in August 1995 for $275,000
- Sold in July 1999 for $400,000
- Sold in January 2005 for $485,000
- Currently listed for $619,000
- Fee simple
- Taxes of $10,384
- Central Air
- Bedroom #1: 16×18 (third floor)
- Bedroom #2: 12×13 (second floor)
- Bedroom #3: 12×19 (second floor)
- Family room: 13×25 (lower level)
Not going north of 500k with those taxes. If they can get the taxes down to a reasonable amount I could see this for 560k.
I love townhomes. I live in one. I think people often overlook these opportunities. The only downside is that most of the time the 3 bedrooms are split on 2 floors, which can be a significant shortcoming.
We recently sold one at 933 W Montana for $530K and there was a fair amount of competition also. The Montana unit was almost 2200 sq ft and had the 3 bedrooms on 2 floors. It also had a somewhat dated kitchen. But it was in a great location, a short walk to the Fullerton el stop.
Oh…and there were no assessments on the Montana unit either. It’s a fairly common situation.
BTW, it is fairly common for people, including realtors, to use the term fee simple synonymously with no assessments. However, the two are not necessarily the same thing.
White stone kitchen countertops frighten me.
Did they do anything to this place that would justify a $134K premium over what they paid for it? I mean, I know the market is hot, hot, hot right now, but even so, that asking price is quite steep.
Before we threw our hands up with the market, we looked at another TH in this complex, which ended up selling in the $580Ks, I believe. That unit had great appeal except that they had converted one of the 2nd floor BRs into a family room — nice, unless you wanted that BR on the 2nd floor. This unit, at least by the pics, may have a *slight* edge over the other in that it doesn’t have the same kooky kitchen appliance lay-out (i.e., range next to fridge), and the master bath has been updated (but the other baths had).
Sorry, I meant to say that in the unit that sold previously, the master bath hadn’t been updated (unlike this one on the market), but the other baths had. Caffeine, why did you fail me?
Interesting post, Sabrina. This unit offers far more space than the condo and is far more ‘practical,’ but it has only a fraction of the charm. With a family, I would choose the town home, but if I were single, with the kind of money that would allow it, it would be the condo hands down.
I really like this place, I could definitely see us living somewhere like this once my kids are in school (and we could actually afford it!). It’s an interesting use of doors as windows too, although I felt a little let down once I realized there wasn’t any outdoor space behind them (except that basement patio).
Decent interior but its butt ugly from the outside. I really hate that mid 70s – mid 80s brick fortress look. I mean, what are they trying to protect against?? Hardly inspires any sense of community.
Clearly at least 134k+~20% of work was done on this place since they purchased it
or they are dreaming
“If they can get the taxes down to a reasonable amount”
Assessed value is $665k, and no H-O exemption (could save ~9%). That’s what taxes are for houses in the city at ~$650k.
BTW, it is fairly common for people, including realtors, to use the term fee simple synonymously with no assessments. However, the two are not necessarily the same thing.
BTW: it is fairly common for people, including realtors, to really exaggerate a listing’s high points, totally downplay its low points and completely misrepresent reality in any way shape or form!
“I mean, what are they trying to protect against??”
Brown people. Duh.
“Clearly at least 134k+~20% of work was done on this place since they purchased it”
It does look like the kitchen and master bath are recent, and the 2d bath partly. Plus a general refresh (paint, floors, etc). Doubt it cost $134k, nevermind $170k+.
well you are correct the bathrooms and kitchen look renovated (maybe, this is a 2005 purchase afterall)
but the renovation does suck… I repeat once again people… STOP BUYING LIGHTING FIXTURES FROM HOME DEPOT THEY LOOK LIKE ASS!
$525k, give or take $25k.
Reasonably nice rehab, lots of space, the bedroom layout shouldn’t scare away most families, outdoor space, a garage…and a pretty decent location. A family with one or two kids could be very happy here, especially if they’re enthusiastic about Alcott.
I would not call this the same (feeling) neighborhood as the place on Arlington. Wrightwood east of Clark is one thing, but heading west from the always busy Dunlay’s/Clark/Wrightwood intersection, Wrightwood is quite the thruway for a couple of blocks (not horrible, but it’s no Arlington), and where this property is located, is similar (not the same, but almost) in feel to the dreaded Drummond/Geneva Alley bizzaro world near Alcott/Best Buy/etc. Again, it’s a decent location, but it’s not quite like being near Arlington and Geneva.
How is Larrabee just south Armitage? My redfin watch list is full of 3 and 4 br townhouses in the Lincoln school district, and there seem to be a number sub 600k. A number are quite dated.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1936-N-Larrabee-St-60614/home/13345686
For instance.
Nat, that place at 1936 Larrabee would have been a bit far west for me, and Larrabee is generally nicer north of Armitage (though at least it’s north of Willow, which helps). That said, as between this Wrightwood listing and 1936 Larrabee, I’m inclined to favor the Larrabee listing.
I agree with anonny. Larrabee is not the best street in LP — especially south of armitage. There is a long stretch of public housing (at least I think that’s what it is?) on the east side of Larrabee between North & Armitage. With that being said, it’s still in Lincoln and part of a great neighborhood that’s close enough to Oz park, the lake/zoo etc. I prefer the Larrabee listing as well.
“There is a long stretch of public housing (at least I think that’s what it is?) on the east side of Larrabee between North & Armitage”
Covered in a recent-ish post:
former public housing privatized in the late 90s (during an ownership push from HUD), and all privately owned condos now.
Also, a senior housing building, which is (I’m fairly certain) still public housing.
thanks anon (tfo). I thought I remembered seeing something about that.
I’m wondering what, if any, positive or negative impact the Webster Square development will have on the area (i.e., Larrabee, Oz, Webster, etc.). Personally, I’m all for the new grocery store. I don’t mind the proposed row/townhomes either, but would certainly prefer that 80+ (or whatever the number’s at now) condos not be put into play in the neighborhood. Unfortunately, the only meaningful opposition has been with respect to the store, which is the one thing the neighborhood really needs. The whole dust-up with the new alderman (who’s against the proposed development) is really pretty strange, and I wonder how it will be resolved.
Sonies I did not notice the lights at first but god you are right. What’s with that thing in the shower? Home depot has some alright stuff but this aint it.
“Unfortunately, the only meaningful opposition has been with respect to the store, which is the one thing the neighborhood really needs.”
I’m totally with you. I don’t understand the CRAZY vocal opposition to the grocery store, yet no one is making a big stink about the new housing going into the neighborhood???? I don’t get it at all. I would think the additional housing would affect housing prices and contribute to overcrowding issues at Lincoln — which is way more serious than a loading dock at a grocery store.
“I’m totally with you. I don’t understand the CRAZY vocal opposition to the grocery store, yet no one is making a big stink about the new housing going into the neighborhood???? I don’t get it at all. I would think the additional housing would affect housing prices and contribute to overcrowding issues at Lincoln — which is way more serious than a loading dock at a grocery store.”
There is very little rational about NIMBYs.
Why do they think that delivery trucks would drive down Webster in any event?
Michele Smith seems to be on the “no development” slate.
shower chandelier = 100k markup 🙂
and modernists.
“I mean, what are they trying to protect against??”
“Brown people. Duh.”
The concern is that the access points to service the store would all be right off of Webster, and that is a tight squeeze there. To be clear, Smith is not against having a development, just that a big retail/commercial development would make much more sense at the old Children’s site, which will be available very soon, as the Lincoln/Fullerton intersection is busier. I am usually the first one to laugh at NIMBYs but if you look at the proposed plans, I agree with her on that one.
Michelle: there is already a grocery store a block away from Fullerton/Halsted. And the stretch of Lincoln in front of Children’s is WAY more congested than at Lincoln/Webster. That said, I wouldn’t mind if the development was at that intersection. But I find most of the arguments against the development at Webster to be contrived and self-serving. A grocery at that location would serve the residents of the immediate area better and traffic is a fact of life in this neighborhood. It is NIMBYism that is opposing this.
Michelle Smith knows exactly who elected her and is pandering. Smart lady…
“Michele Smith seems to be on the ‘no development’ slate.”
Which is odd, given her platform of wanting to revitalize Clark and get new businesses in all of those vacant storefronts. Yet a huge closed/soon-to-be-closed healthcare campus is allowed to rot in the hot sun? Her absolute opposition to the Webster Square development is also quite different from her somewhat ambivalent/wishy washy “opposition” to the proposed stadium lights at Parker (a proposal that, thankfully, is no more…but it was still a live issue during the election).
I do think it was wrong to push the approval of the Webster project through with the blessing of an outgoing alderman, and I commend Smith’s opposition to the project to the extent that it stands to create (i) more condos and (ii) more traffic. But I fear that the only thing she’s going to succeed in blocking is the one thing we need, which is the store (she’s now, quite wisely, seeking to thwart the developers’ efforts to secure a liquor license).
“The concern is that the access points to service the store would all be right off of Webster”
They’ll need to drive 3/4 of a block on Webster. It’s not meaningfully different than when it was a hospital.
‘There is very little rational about NIMBYs.’
Well not quite anon. Most of the neighborhood understands that *something* is going there, but few want a national chain big box store, grocery or not, especially when the hood has independents such as Carnival Grocery, Big Apple, and LP Market; the new store(s) could be a mini Walmart, Staples, Aldi, etc., as the neighborhood doesn’t have a say in what brand(s) or evern type of store goes there… grocery is what the developer has said they would like. Name a faceless suburban strip mall chain that would be a *good* match to all those beautifully renovated and maintained Mid-North historical district homes.
What makes the area so popular is not so much what it has… it’s what it *doesn’t* have, and we’re trying to keep it that way. All the charming tree line streets with its preserved architecture that everyone seems to love, just didn’t happen by letting developers/outsiders have there way.
I agree with Red G about the 70s fortress look. Unfortunately, you see it all over Lincoln Park. One of my friends growing up lived in a place like this on Mohawk or Hudson (can’t remember). Being inside it was like being in a fortress. You couldn’t even see the street. Very dark and confining. This place looks a little better, but not much.
“What makes the area so popular is not so much what it has… it’s what it *doesn’t* have, and we’re trying to keep it that way. All the charming tree line streets with its preserved architecture that everyone seems to love, just didn’t happen by letting developers/outsiders have there way.”
I don’t disagree, but why is ALL the focus on the grocery? the condos would presumably take away from the neighborhood feel as well. Also – I wonder what else has been proposed for the vacant site? Other than a park… I don’t see much else we could put there that wouldn’t upset someone.
“but few want a national chain big box store, grocery or not, especially when the hood has independents such as Carnival Grocery, Big Apple, and LP Market; the new store(s) could be a mini Walmart, Staples, Aldi”
I thought it was going to be a 12,000 sq ft “Fresh Market,” which seems to be a far cry from Aldi, etc. We do our big shops (i.e., by car) at Whole Foods, and use LP Market and Big Apple here and there (by foot). While those two neighborhood stores are o.k., they could be a lot better. Assuming that the Fresh Market is what I understand it to be, we’ll certainly walk there fairly often (I can’t see driving there). I think a big portion of the proposed Fresh Market would be deli/cafe/ready made foods, coffee bar, wine/beer and cheese/specialty foods, i.e., the categories in which LP Market and Big Apple are most lacking (my sense is that this is why Smith is going after the liquor license – a tactic that would be of minimal value with an Aldi or Walmart, but the death knell to a relatively fancy/boutique place). A Fox & Obel would be great, but something in between that and the rather underwhelming LP grocery stores would be most welcome. If the plan gets changed to something like an Aldi or Walmart, I’ll be happy to join you in chaining my self in protest to the current structure.
“Well not quite anon. Most of the neighborhood understands that *something* is going there”
Do they? Then they shouldn’t let people who should like out of touch NIMBYs get all the press.
Here is a rendering (maybe not current?):
http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/lincoln-park-times/2011/05/alderman-smith-tries-to-stop-webster-square-development-again.html
Can you *honestly* say that whatever goes into the retail space in the existing parking garage is going to have the most disruptive effect on the neighborhood environment?
ps:
if there’s a national chain to be actually concerned about, it’s Walgreens, trying to compete with the two CVSs each two blocks from here.
Fresh Market said they would love to be there, but there is NO guarantee. And how do you guarantee that *any* merchant will follow thru? Think about… lets say FM or a Whole Foods leases the property, it doesn’t work out for whatever reason, the door is then open to most *any* retail that can afford the rent on such a large space that would love to get their toes into that area… hello mini Walmart. The neighborhood doesn’t want to open that door, and I agree with it. Personally, I would love Fox & Obel or a cool Goddess & Grocer, as many in the hood including myself use the local grocery stores, but you’re right anonny, they could do a better job… I imagine being mom & pops, they don’t have the deep pockets to install dry aging vaults for grass fed beef and other LP necessities.
The initial talk about using the tower for senior retirement apartments sounded like a good idea for most, including myself, as seniors tend not to have young kids that need public schooling; Lincoln is alreay full. The single family / low density houses = great idea. We all know something is going there… what that will be is another question.
I agree, senior housing would have been a good choice.
As would a decent smallish/boutique hotel. As of now, the only decent option north of the Gold Coast is the Belden-Stratford (which, while a bit dated, is arguably the best deal in town; availability is often an issue). Between parents visiting DePaul students, and parents and/or other family or friends visiting residents in the immediate area, there is certainly a need for more hotel accommodations (be it with luxury-type hotel rooms, or more practical Belden-style units with kitchens, bedrooms, etc.). A nice hotel would be good for tax revenue, employment, (maybe) traffic, and the neighborhood in general, all without impacting the schools.
“I agree with Red G about the 70s fortress look. Unfortunately, you see it all over Lincoln Park.”
The neighborhood stunk in the 1970s. What do you think they would have built there with the high crime rate etc? You had to have protection from the outside- hence the brick walls, few windows to the outside etc.